In 2023, amid a national reckoning on issues of race in America, seven Army bases’ names were changed because they honored Confederate leaders.
Now, those same bases are returning to their original names, this time with different namesakes who share Confederate surnames. The Army located other service members with the same last names to honor.
This change is generating discussion both within military circles and beyond. Some skeptics question whether the real objective is to undermine moves away from Confederate associations, a contentious issue that divides those who wish to preserve this aspect of southern heritage and those who seek to remove accolades for individuals who supported slavery.
Marc Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League, a civil rights group, said the latest renaming is a “difference without a distinction.”
The removal of names assigned by the Biden administration, many of which honored female or minority service members, is the latest action by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to align with Trump’s agenda to eliminate all programs, policies, books, and social media references related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Neither the Department of Defense nor the Department of the Army responded to emailed requests for comment.
Confederate names return
Federal law now bars the military from returning to honoring Confederates, but the move restores names know by generations of soldiers. Following the election of President Abraham Lincoln, who opposed the expansion of slavery, 11 southern states seceded from the United States to form the Confederacy, or the Confederate States of America, to preserve slavery an institution that enslaved millions of African Americans. Their secession led to the Civil War, which the Confederates ultimately lost in 1865.
By restoring the old names with soldiers or figures who were not Confederates, “they are trying to be slick,” Morial said.
For example, Fort Bragg in North Carolina, which was changed to Fort Liberty by the Biden administration, was the first to have its original name restored, in June. The Army found another American service member with the same last name, a World War II soldier. Hegseth signed an order restoring the name in February.
“By instead invoking the name of World War II soldier Private Roland Bragg, Secretary Hegseth has not violated the letter of the law, but he has violated its spirit,” Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., wrote in a statement opposing the defense secretary’s “cynical maneuver.”
In March, Hegseth reversed the 2023 decision changing Fort Benning in Georgia to Fort Moore.
The same name restoring process applied to the additional seven bases: Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Pickett and Fort Robert E. Lee in Virginia, Fort Gordon in Georgia, Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Polk in Louisiana and Fort Rucker in Alabama.
Other name changes
Last week, Republican Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry announced that he was restoring the name of the state’s largest National Guard training site.
In a social media post announcing the name, Landry wrote that in Louisiana, “we honor courage, not cancel it.” Attached was what seemed to be an AI-generated image of a headstone with the word “Wokeism” on it.
“Let this be a lesson that we should always give reverence to history and not be quick to so easily condemn or erase the dead, lest we and our times be judged arbitrary by future generations,” Landry wrote.
Bases aren’t the only military assets being renamed. In late June, Hegseth announced that the USNS Harvey Milk would be renamed after a World War II sailor who received the Medal of Honor, stripping the ship of the name of a killed gay rights activists who served during the Korean War.
Critics express concern over Confederate associations and inefficiency
Morial said there are other ways to recognize unsung heroes instead of returning a base to a name that has long been associated with Confederate leaders.
“No county on Earth would name its military based after people that tried to overthrow the government,” Morial said. “So, why are people holding on to these names?”
Stacy Rosenberg, associate teaching professor at Carnegie Mellon University’s Heinz College, said she is concerned with the inefficiency of renaming bases. She said the cost of changing signages across seven bases could be used for something else that might have more impact.
There is no immediate cost estimate for changing all the signs at the bases.
Rosenberg said it made sense to move away from Confederate heroes as namesakes but that the latest move seems like a way to appeal to Trump’s political base.
“I think what we really need to consider is does whoever the base is named after have such a service record that warrants the honor of having their name associated with that base?” Rosenberg said.
Angela Betancourt, a public relations strategist at Betancourt Group and a United States Air Force Reservist said the ongoing renaming of military bases is a form of branding for what each administration views the military should represent.
While she understands why people are upset about military bases reverting to a name associated with the Confederacy, Betancourt said that should not take away from the new namesake’s heritage and legacy.
“It doesn’t mean it’s not a good thing to do,” Betancourt said. “There’s certainly heroes, especially African American and diverse heroes, that should be honored. I think this is a good way to do it.”
______
The Associated Press reporters Lolita C. Baldor, John Hanna and Sara Cline contributed to this report.
